FlorisOlt

263 pts ยท November 22, 2014


x=1 satisfies the equation. The method by which the answer is attained is false but the answer itself is correct.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

without complex functions, abstract algebra, quantum mechanics and its foundations, Maxwell's equations, Gauss, vector calculus, etc etc 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Our complete modern world only functions through abstract mathematics, though. The very machine you type this on wouldn't function 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

access to a new way of thinking or increases your intelligence should have priority. But that's mostly subjective.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Haha, that's true. While it's important to make distinctions in how important something is to learn, I'd say anything that truly gives 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

something you base on direct applicability. If you only focus on what you can directly apply in the moment, you'll get nowhere. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Because even if something doesn't teach you a directly applicable skill, it could still teach you a way of thinking. Knowledge isn't 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Damn, you win...

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

433.9999*

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

#5 Does anybody have the template for this?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

as the bending (inwards or outwards) of the vertices of those squares. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You know how notebooks have squares in them? Try visualising space as that, except 3D, and the disturbances you see in this video 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's meant as an analogy though, not as a proof.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Tbh it's not entirely accurate, as a lot of scientists don't even back a consistent absolute morality themselves.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

pseudo-scientific speculation, unrooted in facts. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm terribly sorry but I've never seen the consequences of a Minkovski-diagram explained this badly. It began good but quickly became 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I disagree that it is specific to women, but it is very weird that every time somebody is accused of something we seem to grab pitchforks.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Manage our society. I unfortunately can't stop these things from happening, and I won't "put up" just because I can't stop something myself.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Read my first reply. She's a bitch for doing something like this and I'm not supporting her, but mob outrage is NOT the way we should 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Wait, are you saying I should either accept mob outrage or shut up of I don't want mob outrage? Because that just doesn't make sense

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

And does that excuse mob rage outbursts? If she's in prison on felonies concerning this, isn't she already taken care of by our system?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Although what she did is absolute bullshit, why are you all so keen on mob justice? Is that how this site works now?

8 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

Here's a fun one! If it takes a satellite orbiting a planet 1.8 hours to make full orbit, what is the density of the planet?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a chemistry student, I would kill for this

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

''secrets''

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

the fundamental laws of nature work (and to check whether our current theories are right -> hypothesis testing) 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

To smash them into eachother at enormous speeds in order to figure out what the most fundamental particles are, how they work and how 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Anybody else read this in David Attenborough's voice?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But... but... the fourth dimension is spacelike time... we already live in a 4D world...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0